Quote ="TonyGee"For me the main problem with London is they could never decide what they wanted to be and where they wanted to be it. Opportunities have come and gone and now they are back to square one, or even worse off than square one. its only an opinion but taking on the name harlequins has only produced positive results for one of the two rugby teams sharing that name. They no longer have a brand and if you talk about Harlequins in London then there is only one club people are thinking about.
Now you have what amounts to a side show for the union team with Decreasing crowds ( I may be wrong here ) and no real chance to sell the club to the city of london. The problem is that the club needs to do something and settle, but they cant have many chances left. Its all well and good saying we need a club in london, and i would agree with those sentiments. But what we need is a club in london that is easy to identify and can be sold to the public as a club in its own right. Look at what the crusaders have done, surely with a target audience of Millions something similar should not be out of the reach of a london club.
But as things stand they are failing in pretty much every department, And you can only get away with the " look at how many people are playing RL in London " excuse for so long. Its not as if Quins are the only people in the area setting down roots for the game.'"
Yeah, according to my pocket calculator Crusaders will have -294 fans by their 4th home game.... They are still in a bubble but the air would appear to be leaking out pretty fast given that it was only 6700 agin Hull who travel enmasse.
QRL are in trouble, no doubt, but their 1st home game against Sts had over 8000 iirc.
All that said however, i would strongly agree with your previous statement. Problem is - and it has been said before - that was London Broncos, but that is unfortunately history. If as the consensus would appear QRL is heading for the end of the pier itself, then where and how is that identity achieved?